So noted. Be advised that some use the OASPA membership list in such a manner as you describe. Both white-lists and blacklists have their value; one of the weaknesses of a white-list is that it takes time for a journal or publisher to appear on the list, thus eliminating young journals from the list’s coverage. Blacklists are more immediate.
But you are correct; I cannot do this forever. At some point, it will end.
I have not analyzed that journal, so I cannot say anything about it at this time.
There are very many new, standalone mega-journals such as this one appearing all the time. I am unable to analyze the all. Try to submit your work to the best possible journal.
No, it is not.
Thanks Dr.,
I will submit my article to other journal originated from any established association or society. I have inquired about this journal as i am receiving mails from the journal to publish the article in their new journals
[…] genomslagskraft. Tillförlitlig information om tidskriftens A&I-tjänster är värdefull (en del skojartidskrifter ljuger friskt om […]
thank you very much,,,,,sir…..
Did you have a look into the Fluoride Journal Jeffrey?
They also include people as authors(in their author index) who have never submitted an article to the journal.
They reprint abstracts without asking first.
Yes, but I don’t find that it meets the criteria for inclusion on the list. Thanks.
If you publish with them, apparently you get a “Certificate of publication in the Coltharp Institute Journal”. Why would I want such a certificate?!
Interesting that their first conference, for what it is worth, alledgely takes place in Nashville – this is namely not the first mystery regarding Coltharp and Nashville.
http://www.wjle.com/news/2012/one-year-after-his-disappearance-dr-william-coltharp-still-missing
I notice that you will need to pay upfront registration fee when you submit a paper, you are promised refund if rejected, but also revision assistance, so rejection probably will be a non event. And if you would like a second paper, you will need to pay more.
And apparently whatever your topic, all papers go to the same congress that feeds the ten journals.
A scam as there ever was.
In some countries, such as India, it is common for researchers to ask for a certificate so that they can demonstrate to their college or university that they successfully published an article.
Ah, OK, thanks. Still odd, though. I have not heard any of the journals I am involved in offering such certificates. And they’re not exactly IF < 1 journals…
One disadvantage of a whitelist is that the scammers can create their own lists, just as they have created their own publication indices (which happen to rate their own journals highly).
[…] “Competition among open-access publishers is getting stronger and stronger,” writes Jeffrey Beall. “To survive, these publishers must invent new ways to stand out and attract more author fees from researchers.” […]
Their Journal of Education and Human Development now appears to have acquired a genuine Editor in Chief:
What about the indian journal named Paripex?
It’s published by a firm called “The Global Journals,” which is on my list. I recommend not submitting any manuscripts to this journal.
A beginner, not a predator.
I have not read all the posts, but I recognize some of the frustration that I saw in some other participants during my first Omics Conference experience as an authorizing organizer and speaker. I am participating in a second conference as an organizer next year; and I have published 3 papers in Omics journals. So, my comments should be weighed based on these disclosures.
The blogger’s statement, “I strongly recommend, in the strongest terms possible, that all scholars from all countries avoid doing business in any way with the OMICS Group,” is so extreme that it warrants scrutiny itself regarding its motivation and integrity, too. And for criticism that is so damning, supporting it with anonymous statements, which are either false or from cowards, is not acceptable. Surely, given their “testimony” such masked persons are not worried about being retaliated against by Omics.
I have enjoyed working with the OMICs Group staffers. The review of my papers has been as adequate as any other peer-reviewed journal in which I have published, though perhaps less capricious. Since it is an open access journal, I was never misled about publication costs. If anything, they have been aggressive about selling memberships, but I have not spent a penny more than I was told I would or expected to spend.
Omics Group is not good at organizing meetings, yet, but I expect that this is just growing pains and perhaps focusing too much on the number of meetings instead of the overall quality of them. But listen, everyone, scientific meetings as a for-profit business is now old news. I have participated in several other for-profit conferences over the years. Some, which started out with bad reviews and skepticism like Omics, are now highly rated and very popular scientific forums. Scientists who used to turn-up their noses at these conferences are now gracious headliners. Unlike non-profit meetings, the conference staff organizes the scientific program instead of selected (often self-selected) scientific organizing committees. Non-profit meetings draw their participants from their preeminent reputations and scientific society associations. For-profit meetings draw their participants based on the reputations of noted scientists who they invite and ask to recommend other speakers in their fields. Sometimes with their expenses covered, but not always. Whether for-profit or non-profit, invited speakers are some times asked to cover a part of or all of their expenses. So, most of what is being condemned about Omics is not unique to the growing pains of learning how to develop numerous quality scientific conferences across diverse research disciplines.
Now, the one thing I do hear consistently underplaying in even critical posts is that Omics is succeeding in one of its stated missions: Increasing dissemination of scientific research and increasing opportunities for the training and development of young scientists. Many comments say that Omics was not responsible for the learning, scientific exchange, experience, and new collaborations that occurred at their meeting. This pronouncement is quite unfair. Of course Omics must be given some share of the credit for these important positive attributes. I took advantage of the opportunity Omics offered me to bring together scientists who, in some cases, might never share the same scientific forum though working in the same field. What a great opportunity! The rooming accommodations were excellent, the conference venue was very good, and although I had some new minor roles requested of me at the meeting [growing pains again], the science that came together was quite remarkable. And that is what every scientific conference should count for success.
I can’t wait to see the growth that I expect to have occurred by my next meeting.
James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D.
Invited Omics Conference Organizer
Cell Science 2014
Valencia, Spain
Dear Jeffrey, Please take note of the journal “INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATION IN SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS (IJSIM)” Their website is: “http://www.ijism.org/index.php/en/” There are a lot of grammatical errors on their website. For Instance, check this: “ARTICLE PROSSECING FEE”. I believe this is another fake journal.
